Quick Responses To Tired Pro-Choice Catchphrases

Fr. Frank Pavone | National Director, Priests For Life

You’ve heard them.  I’ve heard them.  We’ve all heard them.

Whenever a politician tries to justify his or her support for abortion, we hear the same worn-out responses.  Candidates use these slogans – they’re not reasoned arguments – to avoid talking about what it is that they really support.  And what they really support is the dismemberment and decapitation of babies in the womb.

So let’s go through some of the more common evasions “pro-choice” pols use over and over (and over) when dodging their support for abortion, followed by some quick replies.

“I respect your views, but I have to represent all the people.”

But that’s precisely what we in the pro-life community are trying to say.  If an official thinks some people can be killed with impunity, how is he representing them?

“I’m personally opposed to abortion, but can’t impose my views on others.”

Abortion is not a question of views, it’s a question of violence.  The law is supposed to protect us from physical attacks regardless of the views of those who seek our demise.

“The government should not be involved in such a personal decision as abortion.”

The government is already involved in abortion.  It permits it and in some cases pays for it.  What’s more, taking the life of another – or committing any kind of violence against an innocent person – is not held by any civilized society to bejust a “personal decision.

“Legislators should not be practicing medicine.”

It’s not “practicing medicine” to tell doctors that there will be consequences if they intentionally kill their patients.  Lawmakers routinely regulate the medical profession to ensure patient safety.  All we ask is that the unborn be included under that umbrella of protection.

“Abortion is the law of the land.”

The law of the land can be changed.  Slavery and segregation were once “the law of the land.”  If a politician says his hands are tied because the Supreme Court has spoken on abortion, ask him, then, if he throws up his hands whenever the Supreme Court issues a decision with which he disagrees.  Or does he work to overturn that decision?

“I support women’s rights and health.”

Supporting women’s rights and health is precisely why one should oppose abortion.  A large and growing body of evidence, including thousands of personal testimonies, shows that abortion harms women physically, psychologically, and emotionally.

“Abortion is just one of many issues; I embrace a consistent ethic of life.”

The foundation of a house is just one of that building’s many parts, but without it, the other parts cannot stand.  The right to life is foundational, without it other rights can’t exist.  It demands priority.

“The office I seek does not involve any decision-making about abortion.”

A politician’s view on abortion reflects his character and worldview.  If he cannot stand up for the smallest children, how can he stand up for the rest of us?  Further, politicians who seek lower-level offices usually aspire to higher positions where setting abortion policies is part of the job.

“Let’s just agree to disagree.”

Of course, in general, we should respect the opinion of those with whom we disagree, but when victims are oppressed, we shouldn’t just sit back and “agree to disagree” with the oppressor.  We should intervene on behalf of those being denied their rights and their very lives.

Finally, President Ronald Reagan famously said of politicians, “When you can’t make them see the light, make them feel the heat.”  In that spirit, in this election season there is one more response we can give to those seeking to govern us, especially those who can’t tell the difference between serving the public and killing the public.  It’s a response all can understand – “I vote.”

Tags : abortion fr frank pavone pro life movement supreme court
Loading comments...
© Copyright 2010 - 2018 | The Daily Caller